Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

http://www.linktothearticlegoeshere.com/article
Title of the Article
Author's Name
Indianapolis Star

Rule #6

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.
See more
See less

Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

    There wasn’t any loud music blaring or players bouncing around celebrating inside the locker room.

    That’s because the Indiana Pacers only took one step, albeit a much needed one, when they beat the Dallas Mavericks 103-83 at Bankers Life Fieldhouse on Friday night.

    The Pacers know they still have a lot of work to do. They simply needed something to get them jump started after a handful of close defeats and a blowout loss to Milwaukee two nights earlier.

    “I just thought we played a little harder, played a little smarter and did what we had to in terms of our execution,” Pacers forward David West said. “We can’t overreact. We have to continue to get better. Obviously we are not where we want to be. We have to continue to improve. That has to be our mindset.”

    Coach Frank Vogel knew change was necessary, too. That’s why when the Pacers took the court for their shootaround Friday morning he surprised his players by scrapping the offensive system that wasn’t working during the first nine games and implementing a system that pushes the tempo and has constant ball movement.

    A 60-minute practice session provided the Pacers with their second highest point total of the season, a season low in turnovers and all five starters scoring in double figures.

    “This could be a changing factor with our team,” Pacers swingman Paul George said. “It’s a huge relief. We let a lot of games go. It was good to come out early and jump on them.”

    Vogel had the change the offense because too often there was more standing around and watching instead of cutting and moving.

    That’s fine if you have a Kevin Durant or LeBron James on your roster to carry you.

    The Pacers don’t have a player that can create his own shot. They have to use a team approach, and in order for that to work there has to be trust in one another.

    “We talked about re-establishing a belief in ourselves as a basketball team, belief in ourselves individually that we’re capable of doing great things,” Vogel said. “And continue to believe in teammates that are struggling and that’s an important element in getting yourself out of a rut.

    “Getting a team out of a rut is to continue to trust that we have good players on this team that when the ball moves and we’re sharing it and we’re playing for each other that we’re going to be pretty good.”

    That trust was on display in the third quarter when the Pacers blew the game open.

    Guard Lance Stephenson scored 10 of his 12 points in the third quarter to help the Pacers overcome a halftime deficit.

    Stephenson made both of his 3-pointers during the quarter when West and George Hill passed up shots to make the extra pass to get an even better shot.

    Stephenson’s second 3-pointer gave the Pacers a 14-point lead and had him backpedaling down the court blowing on his three fingers.

    The Pacers outscored the Mavericks 28-18 in the third quarter and eventually led by as many as 22 points in the fourth quarter.

    The Pacers also got a lift from Sam Young off the bench because his teammates believed in him to make shots.

    Young, who has had trouble passing the ball and making shots beyond five feet of the basket, scored 14 points on 6-of-11 shooting in 21 minutes.

    “(The new offense) opens up the door for a lot of our players to be creative and just play basketball,” Hill said. “I think in our last offense we were thinking too much, ball wasn’t moving, staying on one side of the floor. This new offense demands for the ball to move from side to side. You have to tip your hat to the coaching staff.”
    http://www.indystar.com/apps/pbcs.dl...=2012211170316

    Seeing this and how much better the offense looked, I'm already feeling a lot better about Vogel and the rest of this season.

  • #2
    Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

    Oh, so when we say new offense, we mean he actually installed an offense.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

      Props to Vogel for making some things happen. Still need to see the change over a few games, but 1-0 and a healthy victory since our Milwaukee drubbing sure beats 0-1.
      "Look, it's up to me to put a team around ... Lance right now." —Kevin Pritchard press conference

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

        Not only was an offense installed, but it happened in one shootaround the morning of the game. So much for it taking an entire preseason and lots of practice time to install a change of offense. Coaches who can't or won't do so simply are either stubborn or inept, or both.

        I suspect that most players have been brought up to understand ball movement, but when told to create their own shot they frequently forget to look for anybody else.

        Ultimately, though, this calls for at least a single

        and a as to why it took this long to figure this out when virtually every poster here recognized the issue several games ago.

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

          The ball and player movement were a lot better last night, though there will still moments where it stalled. We've got a long way to go and lots of other things to work on, but we're on the right track.

          It's amazing how this happens to every team at the beginning of every season. Players pick up really bad habits in the offseason from playing pickup games. It usually takes until mid-December for offenses to start gelling again.

          Remember when the Pacers looked good at the beginning of the season under O'Brien? It's because we were outworking teams that weren't sharp offensively. Then when offenses started to gel we'd go on a long losing streak as our hard play was no longer enough to overcome good execution. That's exactly what I see happening to the Bobcats this season.

          Also, as teams start executing, players who play better in chaos, like Lance and Tyler, will have to adjust to continue their higher level of play. That's something to keep in mind.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

            I don't understand why it took a year plus to realize that the offense needed to change

            I don't buy the bs excuse of "our previous offense was based on Danny Granger" either, all this is telling me is that for some reason Vogel has been as stubborn as the previous coach and only changed the offense because he felt the pressure, it was either change the offense and start winning or you are fired.
            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

              Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
              I don't understand why it took a year plus to realize that the offense needed to change

              I don't buy the bs excuse of "our previous offense was based on Danny Granger" either, all this is telling me is that for some reason Vogel has been as stubborn as the previous coach and only changed the offense because he felt the pressure, it was either change the offense and start winning or you are fired.
              One vast difference between Vogel & Satan. Frank was able and willing to change in the face of the obvious and Satan was not.


              Basketball isn't played with computers, spreadsheets, and simulations. ChicagoJ 4/21/13

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

                Bu-bu-but Vogel's offense was fine last year, there's no need to change it!

                I'm glad he's making adjustments. It's about time! Sounds like the right idea, as long as it's more than three or four plays. Hopefully this will show the players that they too can do more than make excuses.

                Edit: Does Mr Wells watch the Pacers? There are two guys that can create their own shots. Our starting 1 & 2.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

                  Originally posted by Peck View Post
                  One vast difference between Vogel & Satan. Frank was able and willing to change in the face of the obvious and Satan was not.
                  Well Satan changed for few games, remember when he fooled everybody but me? yeah I'm patting my own back again
                  @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

                    Didn't Vogel just go back to the Offensive system that we ran last year and 86 the new offence he was trying to implement this year? That's what I thought Quinn Buckner was saying during last nights broadcast.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

                      Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                      I don't understand why it took a year plus to realize that the offense needed to change
                      Guess you missed the part where they said that the offensive changes were just going back to some of last years stuff, with new wrinkles, but that the overall approach was to go back to the basics.

                      Coach Frank Vogel went back to the basics in his offense, calling fewer plays and allowing his players more freedom to move and react to the defense. It resulted in a 103-83 win over Dallas at Bankers Life Fieldhouse that was the Pacers' first double-figure win of the season and offered the first glimmer of hope that Danny Granger's absence won't send them reeling back into lottery world.
                      "We're getting back to the fundamentals of our system that we've gotten away from," he said, speaking confidently and deliberately. "We're going to implement a change that can happen immediately in terms of more flow in our offense.


                      "It's a subtle change we're putting in that can happen immediately. We know execution will take time, but the force and speed with which we play and the movement we should exhibit should happen right away."
                      http://www.nba.com/pacers/news/getting-back-basics

                      I find it funny that some posters who said the Pacers needed to change some things are embracing last night, when last night was just more like last season. There wasn't much difference in what they were trying to do, but there was a whole lot of difference in how they attacked doing it. Cuts last night were with purpose. Beginning the season they were slow and weren't focused on clearing space, or trying to free themselves up if it was a designed cut to get offense.



                      It's been pointed out that Dallas didn't double team. That's part of it, but the other part is that teams were waiting to double when the post players put the ball on the ground. Last night, there was no time to wait. The pass was being made, and then the offensive player was making a decision right away and making a move. It didn't allow the double team to ever get in position to be effective.

                      It's amazing how the same system looks different depending on how the players execute it.
                      Just because you're offended, doesn't mean you're right.” ― Ricky Gervais.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

                        Originally posted by vnzla81 View Post
                        Well Satan changed for few games, remember when he fooled everybody but me? yeah I'm patting my own back again
                        Yeah, that never happened.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

                          I agree, George Hill and David West were much better last night than in recent nights, just think West's 16 foot jumper is still off and he only scored 15 points he should have scored 24. Sam Young was a good pick up if he can keep making open shots. Gerald Green has a good offensive game, we need him to shoot more, he will be a 10 ppg guy for us this year. Hibbert FINALLY had a good game!!!!!!!!!

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

                            Originally posted by cdash View Post
                            Yeah, that never happened.
                            Yes it did, just ask Peck and whoever made the promise to give the clown the benefit of the doubt for some games(20+ games I think) the clown promised that he was going to change, there was even an interview of the clown with Hicks and Gnome telling them how much he was going to use Hibbert down low.
                            Last edited by vnzla81; 11-17-2012, 04:39 PM.
                            @WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Re: Mike Wells: Vogel installed a new offense before Friday's game.

                              So this is not Smash Mouth??????????
                              "So, which one of you guys is going to come in second?" - Larry Bird before the 3 point contest. He won.


                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X